Non-resident members (Con.) (Mass.): Constance C. Hart; North Texas State Normal School (Benton): STANFORD UNIVERSITY, MEDICAL DEPT. (San Francisco). -Louis D. Mead. U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE (Wash.). -Carl L. Alsberg, W. N. Berg, H. E. Buchbinder, George A. Geiger, William Salant, Louis E. Wise, Harold E. Woodward. U. S. FOOD-RESEARCH LABORATORY (Phila.). -Ernest D. Clark, Joseph S. Hepburn. UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA, GRADUATE SCHOOL OF MEDICINE (Birmingham).Richard A. Bliss. UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA (Berkeley).-William T. Horne, Agnes F. Morgan. UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO. - Mathilde Koch. UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA MEDICAL SCHOOL (Augusta).-William D. Cutter. UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS (Urbana).-George D. Beal, Isabel Bevier, Margaret B. Stanton. COLLEGE OF MEDICINE (Chicago). -Clayton S. Smith, Grover Tracy, William H. Welker. May. UNIVERSITY OF INDIANA (Bloomington). - Mildred A. Hoge, Clarence E. UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY (Louisville). - Mary E. Sweeny. UNIVERSITY OF MANITOBA (Winnipeg, Can.).-A. T. Cameron. UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA (Minneapolis).-Josephine T. Berry, Ross A. Gortner, Louise McDanell. UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI (Columbia). -Ethel Ronzone. UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA (Missoula).-J. E. Kirkwood. UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA (Phila.).-M. V. Miller, A. N. Richards. UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE (Memphis).-Edwin D. Watkins. UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS (Austin.). -Mary E. Gearing, Anna E. Richardson. UNIVERSITY OF UTAH (Salt Lake City).-H. A. Mattill. UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON (Seattle).-Elizabeth Rothermel. WELLS COLLEGE (Aurora-on-Cayuga, N. Y.). - Ruth S. Finch. Kahn. WILLIAMS COLLEGE (Williamstown, Mass.). -John S. Adriance. WOMEN'S AFFILIATED COLLEGES OF DELAWARE (Newark).-Winifred J. Robinson. YALE UNIVERSITY (New Haven, Conn.).-Lorande Loss Woodruff. Emma A. Buehler, Newark, N. J.; F. C. Hinkel, Utica, N. Y.; Byron B. Horton, Sheffield, Pa.; Cavalier H. Joüett, Roselle, N. J.; E. R. Posner, Des Moines, Ia.; Jacob Rosenbloom, Pittsburgh, Pa.; Adeline H. Rowland, Pittsburgh, Pa.; H. J. Spencer, Factoryville, Pa.; William A. Taltavall, Redlands, Cal.; David C. Twichell, Saranac Lake, N. Y. V FRANCIS HUMPHREYS STORER. Lewis W. Fetzer ON THE BEHAVIOR OF KERATIN SULFUR AND CYSTIN SULFUR, IN THE OXIDATION PAGE OF THESE SUBSTANCES BY POTASSIUM PERMANGANATE. I. Th. Lissizin 18 SERUM DIAGNOSIS OF ROUS'S CHICKEN SARCOMA, BASED ON CHEMICAL METHODS. CONVENIENT METHODS FOR DEMONSTRATING THE BIOCHEMICAL ACTIVITY OF MICROORGANISMS, WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO THE PRODUCTION AND ACTIVITY OF ENZYMES. C. H. Crabill and H. S. Reed REACTION OF RABBITS TO INTRAVENOUS INJECTIONS OF MOULD SPORES, A. F. Blakeslee and Ross Aiken Gortner. 45 STUDIES ON THE PHYSICO-CHEMICAL PROPERTIES OF VEGETABLE SAPS: 3. A comparison of the physico-chemical constants of the juices expressed Aiken Gortner, with the collaboration of John V. Lawrence ... 52 COMPARISONS OF URINARY AND SERUM FINDINGS IN THE DIAGNOSIS OF TUBER- CULOSIS. J. Bronfenbrenner, J. Rockman and W. J. Mitchell, Jr. ...... 80 THE ROLE OF SERUM ANTI-TRYPSIN IN THE ABDERHALDEN TEST. J. Bronfenbrenner, W. J. Mitchell, Jr., and Paul Titus. 86 ON THE NATURE OF THE ABDERHALDEN REACTION. J. Bronfenbrenner A NOTE ON THE ABSENCE OF MORPHINE FROM THE LIVER IN A CASE OF CHRONIC PHOSPHORIC ACID. Edwin D. Watkins ON THE ACCELERATION OF THE OXIDATION OF ALUMINIUM BY MEANS OF MER- Mark J. Gottlieb and Seymour Oppenheimer. 127 THE INFLUENCE OF LOW TEMPERATURES UPON ENZYMES. A REVIEW. PLANT PIGMENTS. THE CHEMISTRY OF PLANT PIGMENTS OTHER THAN CHLORO- PLANT PIGMENTS. THEIR COLOR AND INTERRELATIONSHIPS. B. Horouits.... 161 FURTHER COMMENT ON MUSCULAR WORK AND RESPIRATORY QUOTIENT. THE BIOCHEMICAL SOCIETY, ENGLAND. R. H. A. Plimmer, Secretary FEDERATION OF AMERICAN SOCIETIES FOR EXPERIMENTAL BIOLOGY. WAR ..Philip A. Shaffer, Secretary. 176 PROCEEDINGS OF THE SECOND ANNUAL MEETING OF THE FEDERATION OF AMERI- CAN SOCIETIES FOR EXPERIMENTAL BIOLOGY, IN ST. LOUIS, DEC. 28-30, 1914. PAPERS OF BIOCHEMICAL INTEREST, PRESENTED BEFORE THE AMERICAN Asso- PHILA., DEC. 28, 1914-JAN. 1, 1915. Joseph S. Hepburn SCIENTIFIC MEETINGS OF THE COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY BIOCHEMICAL ASSOCIA- TION, AT THE COLLEGE OF PHYSICIANS AND SURGEONS, NEW YORK. Edgar G. Miller, Jr., Secretary. 193 William A. Perlzweig and William J. Gies. 229 Benjamin Horowitz and collaborators. 242 BIOCHEMICAL BIBLIOGRAPHY AND INDEX. BIOCHEMICAL NEWS, NOTES AND COMMENT. EDITORIALS, INCLUDING BOOK REVIEWS. William J. Gies ..... REGISTER OF MEMBERS OF THE COLUMBIA UNIV. BIOCHEMICAL ASSOCIATION. BIOCHEMICAL BULLETIN VOLUME IV JUNE-SEPTEMBER, 1915 No. 14-15 THE DEPLORABLE CONTRAST BETWEEN INTRA- S. J. MELTZER The chief aim of my remarks is to point out the unique position which medical sciences and medical men occupy in the horrible war which is going on now between civilized nations. International morality may possibly derive some permanent benefit from a conscious knowledge of this position. However, in order to make my point clear, I shall introduce it by a general discussion of some aspects of ethics. Moral philosophy assumes for granted that ethical relations of civilized men are safely established; it concerns itself merely with the question regarding the nature of the origin of ethical precepts. In general, it may be admitted that the vast majority of civilized men indeed do not question the correctness of ethical demands. But writers on moral philosophy fail to distinguish between intranational and international ethics. Hence, we find frequently that international occurrences are discussed from the point of view of intranational principles; international occurrences are brought before the forum of a supreme court of the world for judgment, but the merits and demerits of the cases argued from the point of view of ethics which obtain in intranational moral relations. But the truth is that there is an abyss between the two domains of morality. * Address delivered at the fourth annual dinner of the Columbia University Biochemical Association, March 26, 1915. Let us first look at the status of intranational morality. The ethical relations among civilized fellow-men, united by bonds of race, nation or country, are firmly established. Justice and duty are deeply rooted conceptions, the compelling force of which is spontaneously recognized by all normal members of the individual community; the small fraction of dissenters consists of defectives and criminals. Sympathy, kindness, altruism and self-sacrifice are not enforceable human virtues, but are nevertheless profoundly appreciated and admired by the individuals of all civilized nations. Honesty is an indispensable virtue. In parenthesis I may, however, say here that to my knowledge "honor" is not among the general precepts of ethics. It is an artifact; it is mostly an artificial virtue of a class which considers itself as being above the simple requirements of justice and duty. It is not an unusual occurrence that in the name of honor a man may slay with relative impunity a fellow-man whose home life he has dishonored. From Sokrates to our day students of moral philosophy offered various theories concerning the nature of the principles underlying the "science of conduct." I shall not discuss the merits of the theories of Hedonism or Utilitarianism, the Law of God or the Categorical Imperative; they do not concern us here. But I have to refer to one theory which was not received with great favor and which had only a short life of popular existence. In the latter half of the last century, under the powerful influence of Darwin's theory of natural selection in the domain of biology, a systematic attempt was made by some philosophers (Herbert Spencer and others) to look upon ethics as a purely biological phenomenon. Family ties of lower animals, it was thought, developed into the ethics of civilized nations. Whether on account of the feverish social and altruistic activities which have been going on in the last decade or two and for which a biologic theory of ethics could hardly have served as a sufficient stimulus; or whether on account of the general decadence in popular enthusiasm for the theory of natural selection in general, the fact is that the theory of biologic origin of ethics seems to have been generally abandoned in recent years. But whatever we may think philosophically regarding the nature of fundamental origin of ethics, we can not deny that morality is subject to evolutionary influences; it has undergone and is continually undergoing development. Morality manifests a continuous growth. The development of savage races into cultured, ethical nations is a matter of historical record. In fact, the progressive widening which conceptions like justice or duty are continually undergoing within the confines of a nation is practically a matter of direct observation during an individual's lifetime. I shall dwell here especially on two elements which are operative in this process. The foremost factor in the evolutionary progress of intranational morals is to be found undoubtedly in the intellectual activities peculiar to man. The growth and development of the sciences, of arts, music, poetry, literature and religion, from their rudimentary phases into their present high states, elevated the specific human character and favored the widening and deepening of morality of any individual nation or rather the morality of the individuals of which these nations are composed. The human intellect may or may not be the primary cause of morality; but the unfolding of human intelligence and the growth of intellectual activities specifically human, are undoubtedly important elements in the growth and development of specific human morality. This connection between intelligence and morality is practically a matter of direct observation. On this basis the further assumption is justified, that even the conscious primitive morality of primitive man did not make its appearance abruptly. It developed very slowly, parallel, to a certain degree, with the development of man in the animal stage into man with rudimentary intelligence. I presume, then, that conscious morality did not begin abruptly, but developed very slowly, parallel with and assisted by the development and growth of human intelligence. However, important as the human intelligence may be, evidently it is not the only controlling factor of morality. We see animals acting towards their fellowcreatures in a manner which, if seen in human beings, we would consider as highly ethical. We all know how animals care for their offspring. We see dogs licking the wounds of their fellowdogs-an act resembling a samaritan service. We see altruistic activities in the communities of the bees and the ants. We desig |